Beauty, Mercy, Justice

The Anointed One: Santorum, the Subculture, and Me

The only good thing you can say about the Republican primaries, beside the fact that they have been hugely entertaining, is that no matter who wins, it means that someone else just as bad or worse has lost. So I cannot help but be pleased to see the rich white guy who desperately wants to be the front runner coming in third in the Alabama and Mississippi contests. Nor can I not celebrate that the amphibiously named other rich white guy did not pull off a badly needed Deep South victory.

Of course the downside is that Rick Santorum has even more momentum. Even the plus side of this- that it is driving Dan Savage insane- does not negate the damage this is doing to the credibility of the Catholic Church in this country.

I know I have spent an inordinate amount of energy decrying the candidacy of Santorum. As his positions do not differ much from the other candidates (aside from Ron Paul) I should probably offer a little of the history of my relationship with what I call “the conservative Catholic subculture” to explain this.

When I returned to the Church in 1979, after a brief sojourn as an charismatic evangelical, and a longer one as a seeker (you can read about it here) I returned to something of a mess. The institutional Church- dioceses, religious orders, seminaries, etc- was almost everywhere controlled by those whose views differed from the magisterium on any number of issues. Liturgies were almost everywhere banal.

I soon found a circle of friends who valued religious orthodoxy, many of whom were involved in the nascent prolife rescue movement. Many of these had come to antiabortion activism from the antiwar movement; it seemed logical to work against what was just another form of violence against the innocent. Nor was that logic confined to young radicals; Democrats from Ted Kennedy to Jesse Jackson to Al Gore were vocal opponents of abortion in those times. It is one of the tragedies of the age to have seen them fall one by one as they aspired to national office.

Some of my new friends, though, were conservative. And while most of my conservative friends were and are more of the Ron Paul, libertarian type, I also, because of the circles I moved in, rubbed shoulders with more conventional Republicans. I argued with them about economics and papal teachings, and it was frustrating, but because it all seemed secondary to the task at hand- fighting for doctrinal orthodoxy and against abortion- it did not seem intolerable. And I accepted the fact that if one is doctrinally orthodox one is likely to encounter a good many people who are conservative by temperament, even though I am by nature a radical, and saw the radical possibilities of orthodoxy, and especially of Catholic social doctrine. As allies in a bigger struggle, I didn’t hesitate to count conservatives as friends. It is sort of like the genial disagreement I have these days with antiwar and anti-imperial libertarians, many of whom are linked on my blogroll: with a common enemy we can set aside our differences.

For now.

At that time, of course, and through the 80s, American interventionism was, if not on hold, at least confined to more minor conflicts. Grenada, yes, some meddling in El Salvador and Nicaragua, indeed. Not good, but a minor thing compared to what we were consumed with. In the eighties I voted for Republicans, under the illusion that this was “voting prolife” and that this meant tolerating the many things I disagreed with.

And then Bush Sr attacked Iraq. This was something on another scale altogether. I was appalled, and in the first issue of Caelum et Terra I published an essay called “A Just War or Just a War?” denouncing the war. That was, I think, the first and last comment on contemporary politics in the five years the magazine was published. It was not that I was apolitical; I paid attention, and always voted. But I have not voted for a major party presidential candidate since 1986. It was just that in those days, the days when I was editing the magazine, I saw the possibility of a vibrant Catholic counterculture emerging. Politics seemed largely irrelevant, given the state we were in.

As the years went by things changed. Eight years of Bush and Cheney and their wars and rumors of wars, of more and more evidence that the whole free market revolution was a veil for the looting of America by the upper classes, traumatized and reradicalized me.

What’s more important, I saw the nascent Catholic counterculture transmute into a subculture: adjusting a little here and there, it more or less adopted the bourgeois American model of life.

I only fully became aware of this when my children were old enough to be schooled. I married late, and when I was younger I knew many homeschooling families, all of whom were radical. Many did not own TVs, and all were critical of the American paradigm. When my wife joined a local Catholic homeschooling group, I was a bit shocked to learn that when the girls got together to play, it was with Barbies. The boys went for airsoft guns, and fake war games in the woods (the older of these are now out of high school, and two of them went directly into the Marines, with the full approval of their family). All of the parents were ardent Republicans, fully supportive of American interventionism. They have many good points, are very generous and kind, and so on, but I never fit in.

In fact, what the local homeschooling group represents is a small outpost of what I call the Republicatholic subculture. No, that is not what they call themselves; they fancy themselves “orthodox Catholics”, and in reality think of themselves as the Real Catholics. They are with the Church on birth control and abortion and sexual morality and dogmatic theology. They are personally devout. They pray the rosary and receive the Eucharist with thanksgiving.

And they are unconsciously so blinded by Americanism that they unthinkingly dismiss anything in the words of Jesus Christ or Church teaching that challenges their faith in America, in its exceptionalism and goodness.

I know many of them, and I like most of the ones I know, and they drive me crazy.

So you see, I feel like I almost know Rick Santorum (indeed, I have friends who are on a first name basis with him). He is their candidate, made in their image. Like many of my friends he is affluent, personally pious, has a bunch of kids that he homeschools, and then sends to Opus Dei high schools. And he is an Americanist first, a Catholic second.

Conservative Catholic EWTN talk show host Al Kresta ran a poll of his listeners on Super Tuesday, and an astonishing 80% of them were Santorum enthusiasts. 80%.

Santorum has become Sanctorum, the anointed one of the conservative Catholic subculture. Non-Catholic pundits are quick to agree that he is the Catholic candidate and to denounce him for it. Few challenge how far he diverges from Catholic social teaching on any but sexual issues. The bishops, who should be clarifying this, are strangely silent. Conservative Catholic bloggers are in love: “Rick Santorum, Catholic Hero” chirps the American Papist.

One wonders when one sees all this what they are thinking. This is a man who deemed it “wonderful” when an Iranian scientist, the father of young children, was, in defiance of international and divine law, assassinated. This is a man who sees no problem with “enhanced interrogation”, ie, torture, who thinks it fine to inflict pain and terror on someone suspected of terrorism. This is a man who has stated his intent to engage in preemptive war, against a nation that cannot be said in any way to pose a threat to the US.

This is a man, in the final analysis, despite his piety, is willing to contradict what his Church teaches to serve America.

This, my friends, is idolatry.

To choose Rick Santorum for president is to choose Nation over Church, this world over heaven, and Mammon over God.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

22 Responses

Bravo! Like you, I stopped voting Democratic years ago when the worship of abortion became paramount. Yet, I could rarely vote Republican for all the reasons you gave, and one more – their love of money, though most wouldn’t call it that. They rightly condemn the “welfare queens”, but can’t see the corporate welfare queens in their midst, which take billions upon billions more than “welfare queens” ever can.

Yes, idolatry is what I think it is, too. Many Christian friends fear losing their freedom of religion, which they believe is endangered by Muslims. Even if this WERE true ( and not just government propaganda), freedom, chosen over the gospel of love, is idolatry….. especially if it means unleashing the demons of war.

Have you ever read any of William Cavanaugh’s work? He is a political theologian who is right up your alley. May I suggest his book: “Migrations of the Holy: God, State, and the Political Meaning of the Church.”

Even though I don’t agree that its idolatry to vote for this guy.I understand where your coming from. When I was asked by some parishioners who I voted for in the primary they almost had a heart attack when I told them that I’m not a republican. As a Christian I try to pick a candidate that best fits our moral principles, often of whom is the lesser evil,which might be that”catholic hero”. Unfortunately, most political positions or parties are not an option for me personally. I would be willing to pay 50% taxes, give up my right to have a gun, and have everyone on food stamps if it meant an end to politically sanctioned abortions.

Actually, Mr. Nichols, I am here to tell you that there are more Catholic, homeschooling families who haven’t “anointed” Rick Santorum than you think; I am one of many. I see Rick Santorum as the best choice presented to us, but he is not perfect, not by any stretch of the imagination. I am not afraid to look at his record; I wish he would understand that all the wisdom of the Church should be regarded. He should obey the Church; it’s his duty and privilege as a Catholic. It would make him a much better candidate. I understand your points; they are well made. For someone like myself who is so young, all the background information is helpful. I know there are some Catholic, homeschooling families who give him way too much credit and accept him wholeheartedly as the heralded Catholic politician of the age; he is not. I know what a hero looks like, and they are die hards. They give it all. He hasn’t surrendered all. I know. We should demand fidelity to the Church he is so fortunately a member of.

The irony is that a truly faithful Catholic could probably walk away with the election if he had a super rich backer buying exposure. Combine the anti-abortion, gun rights, and anti-federal policies of the Right, the comprehensive social safety net, pro-labor, and moderate environmentalist policies of the Left, and the anti-imperialist, anti-corporate, pro- small business of the Libertarian/Green intersection and you’d have the most popular platform.

Very interesting! I’m completely refreshed by your rejection of the American bourgeois tendency among many orthodox Catholics. I wish I could have a chance to really discuss political issues without everyone assuming that because I don’t vote for major party candidates, that I’m not an orthodox Catholic, that I’m not prolife, and that I’m not interested in the state of the world. It’s nice to know it wasn’t always this way!

“We have met the enemy and he is us.”
To add to what Bob brought up, I think the US teeters on meeting the four conditions (CCC #2309) to have a just was waged against us.

Actually, I believe the just war is actually to be waged on the hidden forces behind the growing centralization of power. Since we invaded Libya, whose banking system was backed by gold, there are now only three sovereign banks left in the world that are not a Rothchild owned World Bank: Cuba, North Korea and Iran. Those whose agenda it is to have a godless global society would like nothing better to remain hidden in the bipartisan skirmishes.

That said, I will also be in a local protest this Friday against the Obama Administration’s Federal Health Care Mandate with my friends who are vocally split between Santorum and Paul. So Daniel, I guess I am saying to you that bridges are not meant to “fit in” on one side or another. A bridges purpose is to create, well…a bridge. Great blog by-the-by.

Reblogged this on A Catholic's Journey and commented:
“The only good thing you can say about the Republican primaries, beside the fact that they have been hugely entertaining, is that no matter who wins, it means that someone else just as bad or worse has lost.”

I’m no hearty Rick Santorum fan, and I hold no brief for the interminable messing around in the Middle East. But I think it’s a bit unfair to suggest that Santorum understands nothing about Catholic social teaching. At least he understands the relationship between family life and the doctrine of subsidiarity. And the Democrats, by now, are pure statists, constituted by public workers, a permanent class of dependents, and libertine academic elites. So: people who rifle the public purse; people who are reverse-weaned onto dependence; and perhaps the most irresponsible and intransigent class in the country. It’s a choice between muddling decency and what’s radically awful. There’s a chance, maybe even a pretty fair chance, that we might be able to persuade the self-styled conservatives to retrench from constant war (see Mark Steyn’s recent movement; and, to be fair, consider that Bush Junior did not seek the attack on American soil). There is absolutely no chance, none at all, that the Democrats can be budged from their alliance with the sexual revolution, and all the social destruction it has caused.

Just a week or two ago it was the America Firster Catholics taking issue with Daniel, now it’s the Touchstonistas. Daniel must be doing something right.

And as anyone who has read Touchstone in print and online for the last 10 years knows, there is one thing, and one thing only, that Tony Esolen is obsessed with. It ain’t Dante. One wonders if he is capable of discussing any socio-political matter without using the “social destruction caused by the sexual revolution” meme, and that in the very narrow vein which holds such contempt for the unwashed masses, those “permanent class of dependents” and “the most irresponsible and intransigent class in the country.” Please, let us know how you really feel.

Still have that summer home in Nova Scotia Tony? The time you spend there must really help with finding old ways to say the same thing over and over and over and over again.

For chrissakes find another passion before you die. Old men who are obsessed with fornication are creepy.

Sorry, I am not so sanguine re the Republicans. W may not have sought the attack of 9/11 but he saw it as an excuse to attack Iraq, which had nothing to do with it. And now Santorum and the rest (but not Paul) are itching for wars against Iran and Syria. Not that Obama is much better, though he does seem willing to negotiate.
I understand that the Catholic right makes much of subsidiarity, but they do this without the balancing virtue of solidarity, and render it into something more compatible with individualism.
As it now stands I cannot vote for either major party; a vote for one is a vote for preemptive war, torture, and assassination. A vote for the other is a vote against religious freedom, for abortion, and, unfortunately, also a vote for empire.

Yes, the Catholic “right” makes much of subsidiarity, but only in relation to government. For them, subsidiarity does not apply to large corporations. It’s always been a mystery to me how folks can call for small government without calling for small business. It makes me think that those who call for subsidiarity are using it as a means of rendering government impotent and the capitalist class all powerful. But maybe I just being paranoid.